Afficher la notice abrégée

dc.contributor.adviserAlibogha, Salex E.
dc.contributor.authorOrtiz, Laurence Susan P.
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-12T08:02:20Z
dc.date.available2021-02-12T08:02:20Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationOrtiz, L. S. P. (2016). A content analysis of Supreme Court decisions on the acquittal and conviction of drug related cases under R.A. 9165 (otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002) (Unpublished postgraduate thesis). Central Philippine University, Jaro, Iloilo City.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12852/339
dc.descriptionAbstract onlyen_US
dc.description.abstractThis content analysis was conducted to analyze the acquittal and conviction of drug related cases under R.A. 9165 from 2012-2014. During the said period, the Highest Court has decided one hundred forty five (145) cases. The researcher selected fifty-nine (59) samples from the entire population of one hundred forty five (145) cases to represent the same with a 10% margin of error. From the fifty-nine (59) sample cases analyzed by the researcher forty (40) or (67%) of which the Court has sustained conviction, and nineteen (19) or (33%) were ordered for acquittal. Forty nine (49) cases were filed in violation of Sec. 5 Art. II, of R.A. 9165. This simply showed that Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs has already become rampant. Second in rank is violation of sec. 11, Art. II of R.A. 9165 or Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs which was relatively lower than Illegal Sale of Dangerous Drugs. The table showed that only twelve (12) cases were filed in violation of said section. Third, is the violation of Sec. 5, Art II of R.A. 9165 or Illegal Dispensation and Transportation of Dangerous Drugs which was scarcely filed with only two (2) cases. Lastly, the fourth place is the violation of Sec. 15, Art. II, or R.A. 9165 or Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia where only one (1) case was filed during the said period. Several defenses were taken individually in every case where it was alleged or raised considering that in one case the accused would raise one or more several defenses. The most common defense used in fifty-nine (59) cases is breach on the chain of custody which was raised by the defense in fifty-five (55) cases. It is followed by Illegal Search and Seizure which was raised by the defense in eight (8) cases. Also Frame up and Extortion were used as valid defenses but were relatively raised in seven (7) cases out of fifty-nine (59) sample cases. Further, in few cases, Denial is still raised as a defense. Out of fifty-nine (59) sample cases, the accused raised denial in three (3) cases. Based on the case analysis on the selected Supreme Court decisions from 2012-2014 on the acquittal and conviction of drug related cases under R.A. 9165, it was found out that out of the 59 samples analyzed by the researcher, nineteen (19) cases or (33%) were ordered for acquittal and all acquittal arose out of the non-marking, tampering and clear disregard of the law enforcers of the chain of custody. When the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, especially the corpus delicti of the dangerous drug, the Court will not hesitate to acquit the accused. Buy bust operation has become an effective tool for law enforcers in apprehending drug offenders. Law officers are given presumption of regularity in performing their duty. In both cases of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs, the prosecution must show the chain of custody over the dangerous drug in order to establish the corpus delicti, which is the dangerous drug itself.en_US
dc.format.extentii, 95 leavesen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subject.ddcGSL Theses 340.72 Or85en_US
dc.subject.lcshDrug trafficen_US
dc.subject.lcshDrug abuseen_US
dc.titleA content analysis of Supreme Court decisions on the acquittal and conviction of drug related cases under R.A. 9165 (otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.description.bibliographicalreferencesIncludes bibliographical referencesen_US
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Lawen_US
dc.description.degreeJuris Doctoren_US
local.subjectRA 9165en_US
local.subjectDangerous drugs--Laws and legislationen_US
local.subjectSupreme court cases--Drugsen_US
local.subjectDangerous drugs--Illegal saleen_US
local.subjectDangerous drugs--Illegal possessionen_US
local.subjectComprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002en


Fichier(s) constituant ce document

Thumbnail

Ce document figure dans la(les) collection(s) suivante(s)

Afficher la notice abrégée